4.6 Article

Gingival overgrowth in subjects under immunosuppressive regimens based on cyclosporine, tacrolimus, or sirolimus

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY
Volume 37, Issue 10, Pages 894-902

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01601.x

Keywords

cyclosporine; gingival overgrowth; immunosupressants; microbiology; renal transplantation; risk factors; sirolimus; tacrolimus

Funding

  1. Coordination of Improvement of Upper Level Personnel (CAPES)
  2. Foundation for Support of Research in Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG) [13016]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>Aim To assess the prevalence and variables associated with gingival overgrowth (GO) in renal transplant recipients medicated with cyclosporine (CsA), tacrolimus (Tcr), or sirolimus (Sir). Materials and Methods One hundred and thirty-five eligible subjects were divided in CsA, Tcr, and Sir groups comprising 45 subjects each. GO was visually assessed and subjects were assigned as GO+ or GO- in a post hoc definition. Saliva samples were collected and the presence of periodontal pathogens was assessed through polymerase chain reaction. Variables of interest were compared between GO+ and GO- subjects through univariate and multivariate analysis. Results Prevalence of GO was of 60.0% for CsA, 28.9% for Tcr, and 15.6% for Sir groups. Within the CsA group, GO was associated with papillary bleeding index (p=0.001); within the Tcr group, GO was associated with CsA previous use (p=0.013), and calcium channel blockers (CCB) use (p=0.003); within the Sir group, GO was associated with papillary bleeding index (p=0.018), and CCB use (p=0.020). A higher frequency of Tannerella forsythia was observed among GO+ subjects medicated with Tcr. Conclusion Pharmacological and periodontal variables were associated with GO in different immunosuppressive regimens. Integration between the medical and the dental team may be an important approach in the post-transplant maintenance routine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available